• Keine Ergebnisse gefunden

The Intercessory Role of Mary across Times and Places in Byzantium (4

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2022

Aktie "The Intercessory Role of Mary across Times and Places in Byzantium (4"

Copied!
274
0
0

Wird geladen.... (Jetzt Volltext ansehen)

Volltext

(1)

Die Aufsätze, die das vorliegende Buch vereint, sind einem wesentlichen Aspekt des Marienkultes, den Anrufungen Mariens, Mutter Jesu von Nazareth, im Byzantinischen Reich zwischen dem 4. und dem 9. Jahrhundert gewidmet. Im Verlauf dieser fünf Jahrhunderte entwickelte sich das Reich, in dem pagane Vorstellungen und Traditionen anfangs noch wesentlichen Einfluss besaßen, zu einer rein christlichen Gesell- schaft; am Ende des „Bilderstreites“ oder Ikonoklasmus im Jahre 843 war die Figur Mariens reichsweit als Fürsprecherin für die Gläubigen angesehen. Die Frage nach dem Wie und dem Warum dieser Entwicklung hat über die religiöse Dimension hinaus wesentlich mit den allgemeinen gesellschaftlichen Entwicklungen in Byzanz zu tun. Ausgehend von vielfältigen Quellen und Perspektiven versucht das vor- liegende Buch zu einer Antwort beizutragen, und zwar in ausschließlicher Heranziehung der zeitgenössischen Vorstellungen jener bedeut- samen Umbruchszeit und in bewusster Abgrenzung zu später entstandenen mariologischen Vorstellungen.

Ein wesentliches Phänomen des Marienkultes ist die regionale Unterschiedlichkeit: Der Kult entwickelte sich keineswegs zur gleichen Zeit in gleicher Weise allüberall im Reich, sondern formte sich in unterschiedlichen Regionen eigenständig und verschieden aus. Die hier be- handelten „religiösen Landschaften“ Palästina, Ägypten, Konstantinopel, Syrien, Armenien, Albanien und Gebiete im Westen (Rom, Italien, Nordafrika) – gereiht nach der Wichtigkeit der Entwicklung – decken einen großen Teil des Byzantinischen Reiches ab; sie erlauben auf- grund der günstigen Quellen- und Überlieferungslage eindeutige Aussagen. Die Beitragenden sind international anerkannte Spezialisten des frühen Christentums, der Spätantike und Patristik sowie der byzantinischen Zeit; die relevanten Quellen werden aus Sicht der Archäologie, der Kunstgeschichte, der Literatur- und Geschichtswissenschaft, der Patristik und der Theologie ausgewertet.

* * *

The idea behind the collection of essays in this volume is to bring into focus one main aspect of the Marian cult – the invocations of Mary – across the Byzantine Empire from the fourth to the ninth century. Over the span of the five centuries with which this volume is concerned, the empire turned into a thoroughly Christian society and at the end of Iconoclasm (843) the figure of Mary is found as the intercessor of the entire empire. Why and how this development took place is a question that challenges not only the study of the Byzantine cult of Mary but the study of Byzantine society in general. This volume will be a contribution to the search for an explanation proceeding from highly variegated sources and perspectives subsumed under the title, Presbeia Theotokou. It refers to the doctrine prevailing during this transformative period, which was uninfluenced by later ideas on the significance of Mary’s part in Christ’s role as redemptor.

It is agreed that regional diversity was an inherent element of the cult of Mary; the cult neither developed nor was established at the same time and in the same manner throughout the empire. The glimpses, given here, of different religious “landscapes” in Byzantine territory show first of all the cultural contexts where Mary’s intercessory role manifested itself. The selected regions – Palestine, Egypt, Constantinople, Syria, Antioch, Armenia, Durrës, Rome, Italy, and North Africa – cover a great part of the territory that was under East Roman or Byzantine rule.

The contributors represent expertise in early Christian, Late-Antique and Byzantine Studies. The sources – objects, texts and documents – are examined from vantage points of archaeology, art history, papyrology, sigillography, patristics, religious studies and theology.

Pauline Allen

studied in Australia, UK, and Belgium before teaching at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam and subsequently at Australian Catholic University, where she became the foundation director of the Centre for Early Christian Studies. She is a Fellow of the Alexander von Humboldt-Stiftung and of the Australian Academy of the Human- ities. As well as serving on editorial boards of journals in Russia, UK, USA, Belgium, South Africa, and Australia, she publishes in the area of late antiquity, including John Chrysostom, Severus of Antioch, Sophronius of Jerusalem, and Maximus the Confessor. She is also a Research Fellow in the Department of Ancient Languages Andreas Külzer

studied History of Law, Byzantine History and Literature, Ancient, Mediaeval, and Early Modern History; he is adjunct professor of Byzantine History and Literature at the University of Cologne.

Since 1997 he is working at the Austrian Academy of Sciences as a member of the research group Tabula Imperii Byzantini. Külzer is a fellow of the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, board member of the Austrian Byzantine Society, and member of the Austrian National Committee of the Association Internationale des Études Byzantines. He publishes in the areas of historical geography of the Balkan Peninsula, the Aegean, and Western Anatolia, of Byzantine history, pilgrimages and pilgrimage literature as well as of Byzan- tine anti-Jewish writings. His recent research focuses on Western Asia Minor from Late Antiquity to the Early Modern times.

Leena Mari Peltomaa

holds a doctorate in classical philology (Greek) from the University of Helsinki and is adjunct professor of orthodox hymnography at the University of Eastern Finland. Since 1994 she has based her scholarly activities in Vienna and prepared her book The Image of the Virgin Mary in the Akathistos Hymn (Brill 2001) at University of Vienna’s Institute of Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies. In the course of research for this work it emerged that the early cult of Mary prior to the Council of Ephesus – and especially its origins – had been overlooked in systematic scientific research. Together with Pauline Allen, she founded an international project on early Mariology and organized workshops on the topic at the Oxford Patristic Conferences. Her recent research at the Division for Byzantine Research of the Institute of Medieval Research of the Austrian Academy of Sciences focuses on the Byzantine cult of Mary and the hymnography of Romanos Melodos.

ISBN 978-3-7001-7602-2

x!7ID7A0-bhgacc!

x!7ID7A0-bhgacc!

Pr esbeia Theotokou

VB 39

L. M. PELTOMAA, A. KÜLZER, P. ALLEN (EDS.)

Presbeia Theotokou

The Intercessory Role of Mary across Times and Places in Byzantium (4

th

–9

th

Century)

Edited by

Leena Mari Peltomaa Andreas Külzer

Pauline Allen

(2)

Leena Mari Peltomaa, Andreas Külzer, Pauline Allen (eds.)

PRESBEIA THEOTOKOU

(3)

VERÖFFENTLICHUNGEN ZUR BYZANZFORSCHUNG

Herausgegeben von

CLAUDIA RAPP und CHRISTIAN GASTGEBER

Band 39

ÖSTERREICHISCHE AKADEMIE DER WISSENSCHAFTEN

PHILOSOPHISCH-HISTORISCHE KLASSE DENKSCHRIFTEN, 481. BAND

(4)

Presbeia Theotokou

The Intercessory Role of Mary across Times and Places in Byzantium (4

th

–9

th

Century)

Edited by

LEENA MARI PELTOMAA ANDREAS KÜLZER

PAULINE ALLEN

(5)

Vorgelegt von w. M. Johannes Koder in der Sitzung vom 30. Jänner 2015

Veröffentlicht mit Unterstützung des Austrian Science Fund (FWF): PUB 218-G19

Cover:

Paavo Pirttimaa: “Maria, auta!” (Mary, help!). 2014

Diese Publikation wurde einem anonymen, internationalen Peer-Review-Verfahren unterzogen.

This publication has undergone the process of anonymous, international peer review.

Die verwendeten Papiersorten sind aus chlorfrei gebleichtem Zellstoff hergestellt, frei von säurebildenden Bestandteilen und alterungsbeständig.

Alle Rechte vorbehalten.

ISBN 978-3-7001-7602-2 Copyright © 2015 by

Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Wien Satz: Werbeagentur Crossdesign GmbH, A-8042 Graz

Druck und Bindung: Prime Rate kft., Budapest http://epub.oeaw.ac.at/7602-2

http://verlag.oeaw.ac.at Printed and bound in the EU

Mit Beschluss der philosophisch-historischen Klasse in der Sitzung vom 23. März 2006 wurde die Reihe Veröffentlichungen der Kommission für Byzantinistik in Veröffentlichungen zur Byzanzforschung umbenannt;

die bisherige Zählung wird dabei fortgeführt.

(6)

Contents

List of Illustrations . . . 7 Preface . . . 9 Leena Mari PeLtoMaa, andreas KüLzer

Presbeia Theotokou: An Introduction . . . 11

Palestine

stePhen J. shoeMaKer

The Ancient Dormition Apocrypha and the Origins of Marian Piety: Early Evidence

of Marian Intercession from Late Ancient Palestine . . . 23 rina avner

Presbeia Theotokou, Presbeia mētros: Reconsidering the Origins of the Feast and the Cult of the

Theotokos at the Kathisma, on the Road to Bethlehem . . . 41 Egypt

arne effenberger

Maria als Vermittlerin und Fürbitterin. Zum Marienbild in der spätantiken und frühbyzantinischen

Kunst Ägyptens . . . 49 antonia atanassova

The Theme of Marian Mediation in Cyril of Alexandria’s Ephesian Writings . . . 109 theodorede bruyn

Appeals to the Intercessions of Mary in Greek Liturgical and Paraliturgical Texts from Egypt . . . 115 Constantinople

Leena Mari PeLtoMaa

“Cease your lamentations, I shall become an advocate for you”. Mary as Intercessor in

Romanos’ Hymnography . . . 131 Mary b. CunninghaM

Mary as Intercessor in Constantinople during the Iconoclast Period: The Textual Evidence . . . 139 Syria

CorneLia horn

Ancient Syriac Sources on Mary’s Role as Intercessor . . . 153 PauLine aLLen

Antioch-on-the-Orontes and its Territory: A “terra dura” for Mariology?. . . 177

(7)

Armenia

annegret PLontKe-Lüning, arMenuhi drost-abgarJan

Die Jungfrau Maria als Fürsprecherin in Literatur und Kunst Armeniens bis zum 8. Jahrhundert. . . 189

Dyrrachium (Durrës), Albania gaLina fingarova Mary as Intercessor in the Decoration of the Chapel in Durrës, Albania . . . 203

Italy and North Africa henry Maguire What is an Intercessory Image of the Virgin? The Evidence from the West. . . 219

Appendix: The Contribution of Sigillography aLexandra-KyriaKi WassiLiou-seibt Die sigilliographische Evidenz der Theotokos und ihre Entwicklung bis zum Ende des Ikonoklasmus. . . 233

Presbeia Theotokou: A Bibliography . . . 243

List of Contributors . . . 267

Index . . . 269

(8)

List of Illustrations

Contribution Arne Effenberger

1. Sarkophag der Adelfia. Rom, um 340–350. Syrakus, Museo Archeologico Regionale Paolo Orsi, Inv. 864 (Foto: Hirmer Fotoarchiv München, Archiv-Nr. 571.2002).

2. Adelfiasarkophag, Marienszenen an der linken Deckelstirn, a–c (Fotos: Beat Brenk).

3. Sarkophagfragment, Theotokos Galaktotrophousa. Konstantino- pel, um 400. İstanbul, Arkeoloji Müzeleri, Inv. 5639 (Foto:

Franz Schlechter).

4. Pignattasarkophag im Braccioforte von Ravenna, rechte Neben- seite: Verkündigung. Ravenna, um 400 (Foto: Deutsches Ar- chäologisches Institut, Abt. Rom, Inst. Neg. 66.2785).

5. Krater, Theotokos Galaktotrophousa (Ausschnitt). Konstantino- pel, um 380–390. Rom, Museo Nazionale delle Terme, Inv.

67629 (Foto: Beat Brenk).

6. Doppelsolidus Konstantins I. Kaiserin Fausta als Kourotrophos.

Trier, 324. Berlin, Münzkabinett (Foto: Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, Münzkabinett, Lutz-Jürgen Lübke).

7. Aquarellkopie eines Freskos aus der Nekropole von Antinoë (Medinet el-Fayum). Theodosia zwischen dem hl. Kollouthos und Maria. Antinoë, 5. Jahrhundert (nach Mario Salmi, I dipin- ti paleocristiani di Antinoe, in: Scritti dedicati alla memoria di Ippolito Rosellini nel primo centenario della morte, Florenz 1945, Taf. H).

8. Marienseide (Teile einer Seidentunika). Ägypten oder östlicher Mittelmeerraum, um 400. Abegg-Stiftung, CH-3132 Riggisberg, Inv. 3100b (Credit line: ©Abegg-Stiftung, CH-3132 Riggisberg;

Zeichnung Barbara Matulla).

9. Kom el-Dikka, Alexandria. Marienfresko im Haus D. 6. Jahr- hundert (nach Mieczysław Rodziewicz, Les habitations romai- nes tardives d’Alexandrie à lumière des fouilles polonaises à Kôm-el Dikka (Alexandrie 3), Warschau 1984, Abb. 236).

10. Isis mit dem Horuskind aus Karanis, Haus B 50, Südwand von Raum E. 3./4. Jahrhundert (nach Arthur E. R. Boak – Enoch E.

Peterson, Karanis. Topographical and Architectural Report of Excavations During the Seasons 1924–28, Ann Arbor, MI, 1931, Abb. 49.

11. Maria mit dem Kind. Papyrusfragment. 6. Jahrhundert. Florenz, Istituto Papirologico G. Vitelli, PSI XV 157 (© Istituto Papiro- logico „G. Vitelli“ – Università degli Studi di Firenze).

12. Mariendarstellung in der Alexandrinischen Weltchronik. Moskau, Staatliches Museum der bildenden Künste (Puschkin-Museum), Inv. 310 (nach Adolf Bauer – Josef Strzygowski (Hrsg.), Eine alexandrinische Weltchronik. Text und Miniaturen eines grie- chischen Papyrus der Sammlung Goleniščev. Denkschriften der Kais. Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien, Philos.-Hist. Klasse 51, Abh. 2, Wien 1906, Taf. VII verso, Fragmente D und E).

13. Grabstele einer Mutter mit Kind. Aus Arsinoë (Medinet el-Fay- um). 4./5. Jahrhundert. Berlin, Staatliche Museen, Skulpturen- sammlung und Museum für Byzantinische Kunst, Inv. 4726 (Foto: Bildarchiv Preußischer Kulturbesitz).

14 Theotokos Galaktotrophousa. Saqqara, Gebetsraum A. 6./7.

Jahrhundert (nach James E. Quibell, Excavations at Saqqara 1906–1907, Kairo 1908, Taf. XL).

15. Theotokos Galaktotrophousa. Saqqara, Gebetsraum 1725. 6./7.

Jahrhundert (nach James E. Quibell, Excavations at Saqqara 1908–1909, 1909–1910, Kairo 1912, Taf. XXII.

16. Theotokos Galaktotrophousa. Bawit, Gebetsraum XLII. 6./7.

Jahrhundert (nach Jean Clédat, Nouvelles recherches à Baouît (Haute Égypte). Campagnes 1904–1904, in: CRAI, Paris 1904, Abb. 1.

17. Zweizonige Apsiskomposition mit Theophanie und thronender Theotokos zwischen Heiligen. Bawit, Saal 6. 6./7. Jahrhundert (nach Jean Maspéro – Étienne Drioton, Fouilles exécutées à Baouît par Jean Maspéro. Notes mises en ordre et éditées par Etienne Drioton (MIFAO 59), Kairo 1931, Taf. XXI).

18. Zweizonige Apsiskomposition mit Theophanie und fürbittender Maria zwischen Heiligen. Bawit, Saal 20. 6./7. Jahrhundert (nach Jean Maspéro – Étienne Drioton, Fouilles exécutées à Baouît par Jean Maspéro. Notes mises en ordre et éditées par Etienne Drioton (MIFAO 59), Kairo 1931, Taf. XXXVII).

Contribution Galina Fingarova

1. Amphitheater of Durrës, view of the chapel from the southeast (Photo: G. Fingarova).

2. Chapel complex, plan (D. Andrews, in: Bowes/ Mitchell, ‘The Main Chapel of the Durres Amphitheater’, Fig. 3).

3. Chapel, elevation of the south part (D. Andrews, in: Bowes/

Mitchell, ‘The Main Chapel of the Durres Amphitheater’, Fig. 5).

4. Western alcove, view from east (Photo: G. Fingarova).

5. Western alcove, line drawing of the decoration (Dhamo, ‘Kon- siderata mbi zhvillimin e mozaikut paleokristian në Shqipëri’, Pl. III).

6. Western alcove, view from northwest of the south and west walls (Photo: F. Gargova).

7. Western alcove, mosaic panel on the west wall (Photo: F. Gar- gova).

8. Western alcove, mosaic panel on the west wall, detail of donor figures (Photo: G. Fingarova).

9. Western alcove, mosaic panels on the south wall (Photo: G.

Fingarova).

10. Western alcove, mosaic panels on the south wall, detail of donor figures (Photo: G. Fingarova).

11. Western alcove, painting on the ceiling (Photo with superimpo- sed scaled line drawing of paintings: S. Diehl, P. Haipi, R. Das, in: Bowes/Mitchell, ‘The Main Chapel of the Durres Amphi- theater’, Fig. 7).

12. Naxos, Drosiani, paintings in the dome (Drandakis, Οι παλαιοχριστιανικές τοιχογραφίες στη Δροσιανή, Pl. I).

Contribution Henry Maguire

1. Poreč, basilica of Eufrasius, apse mosaics (Source: author).

2. Tunis, Bardo Museum, ceramic tile from Bou-Ficha. Virgin and Child (Source: after A. Driss, Treasures of the Bardo Museum, Tunis, 1962, pl. 41).

3. London, British Museum, tapestry-woven medallion from a tunic. The Adoration of the Magi (Source: British Museum).

(9)

4. Washington, D.C., Dumbarton Oaks Collection, gold medallion.

Virgin and Child with the Nativity and the Adoration of the Magi (Source: Dumbarton Oaks, Byzantine Collection, Washington, 5. Toronto, Royal Ontario Musuem, silver armband. Virgin and DC).

Child (Source: Royal Ontario Museum).

6. Rome, Catacomb of Commodilla, fresco. The Virgin and Child flanked by Turtura and Saints Felix and Adauctus (Source: after A. Grabar, Byzantium from the Death of Theodosius to the Rise of Islam, London, 1966, fig. 176).

7. Rome, Santa Maria in Domnica, apse mosaics (Source: Scala/

Art Resource, NY).

8. Ravenna, Sant’Apollinare Nuovo, mosaics of north wall (Sour- ce: Cameraphoto Arte, VeniceArt Resource, NY).

9. Rome, Santa Maria in Trastevere, painted panel. The Virgin and Child with donor (Source: Scala/Art Resource, NY).

10. Rome, Santa Francesca Romana, painted panel. The Virgin and Child (Source: Scala/Art Resource, NY).

11. Washington, D.C., Dumbarton Oaks Collection, gold ring. The Virgin and Child (Source: Dumbarton Oaks, Byzantine Collecti- on, Washington, DC).

Contribution Annegret Plontke-Lüning, Armenuhi Drost-Abgarjan

1. Edzani, Relief an der Osrfassade der Kirche, 6. Jh.: Darstellung eines Kreuzdenkmals (nach N. Čubinašvili: Chandisi. Problema rel’efa na primere odnoj gruppy gruzinskich stel poslednej čet- verti V veka, VI i pervoj poloviny VII veka. Tbilisi 1972 Taf.

33 Mitte).

2. Tamala, Arkade des Ostfensters der Kirche: Auffliegende Kreu- ze (Aufnahme A. Plontke-Lüning, Juli 2001).

3. Odzun, Stelenmonument. Südstele, Ostseite: Bildfeld mit dem eberköpfigen Trdat (nach Brentjes – Mnazakanjan – Stepanjan 1981, Abb. 53).

4. Odzun, Stelendenkmal von Westen (Aufnahme A. Plontke- Lüning, Mai 2010).

5. Odzun, Stelenmonument. Nordstele, Westseite: von oben nach unten: Gottesmutter, Geburt Christi, Verkündigung an Maria, Taufe Christi (nach Thierry – Goltz 2002, Abb. 50).

6. T’alin, Kreuzdenkmal in der Nekropole bei der Gottesmutter- kirche (Aufnahme A. Plontke-Lüning, September 2007).

7. a–d. Erevan, Historisches Museum Inv. Nr. 830. Stele aus Vank Xaraba. von links nach rechts: Grigor Illuminator, Maria, Fürst, eberköpfiger Trdat (nach Armenia sacra 2007, Nr. 2).

8. Erevan, Historisches Museum Inv. 2604-3. Stelenkapitell aus Dvin (nach Armenia sacra 2007, Nr. 21).

9. Pemzašen, Türsturz der Trikonchoskirche: Maria, Engel, Stifter (nach Donabédian – Thierry 1988, Abb. 224).

10. T’alin, Stele in der Nekropole bei der Gottesmutterkirche (Auf- nahme A. Plontke-Lüning, September 2007).

11. a–d. Erevan, Historisches Museum Inv. Nr. 1672 a,b: Stele aus T’alin. von links nach rechts: Maria, Taufe Jesu, Johannes Bap- tista, Labarum (nach Armenia sacra 2007, Nr. 13).

12. a–c. Erevan, Historisches Museum Inv. Nr. 1576a, b. Stele aus Haričavank. von links nach rechts: Hl. Grigor und Trdat, Chris- tus, Maria (nach Armenia sacra 2007, Nr. 13).

Contribution Alexandra-Kyriaki Wassiliou-Seibt

1. Av.-Seite des Siegeltypus Kaisers Justinians II. mit Tiberios (Mitkaiser) (nach Zacos – Veglery 29; Bleisiegel).

2. Bleisiegel des Ioannes κουβικουλάριος τῆς θεοστέπτου δεσποίνης (nach Zacos – Veglery 1161).

3. Av.-Seite (Verkündigung des Herrn/Χαιρετισμός) des Bleisie- gels des Ioannes; Museum von Karthago.

4. Anonymes Bleisiegel (nach Zacos – Veglery 1123).

5. Anrufungsmonogramm vom Typus Laurent I (Rv.-Seite eines anonymen Bleisiegels aus Karthago)

6. Anrufungsmomogramm vom Typus Laurent V; Av.-Seite des Bleisiegels des Gregoras πατρίκιος καὶ β. πρωτοσπαθάριος (Sammlung A.-K. Wassiliou-Seibt).

7. Av.-Seite des Bleisiegels des Sergios μητροπολίτης Καρίας (nach Zacos – Veglery 2982a).

(10)

Geleitwort

Presbeia Theotokou, der Titel des vorliegenden Sammelbandes, bewirkt eine spontane gedankliche Verbindung zum Bericht des Evangelisten Johannes (2.1-11) über den „Beginn der Zeichen“ Jesu: Im Verlauf des Festmahls bei der Hochzeit zu Kana macht Maria Jesus darauf aufmerksam, dass es keinen Wein mehr gebe; er weist ihre Intervention zunächst mit den Worten zurück: „Was ist (zwischen) mir und dir, Frau? Meine Stunde ist noch nicht gekommen“, verwandelt dann aber Wasser in guten Wein. Unter den Deutungsansätzen der Worte und Handlungen anlässlich dieses ersten überlieferten Wunders Jesu Christi bietet sich die Fragestellung der Beziehung zwischen Mutter und Sohn, die Rolle Marias als Fürsprecherin bei Jesus als naheliegend an. Dieser Fragestellung wird in dem vorliegenden Sammelband nachgegangen, der in dreizehn Beiträgen die Rolle der Gottesgebärerin als Ver- mittlerin der Menschen zu Gott, insbesondere zur zweiten göttlichen Person untersucht.

Zeitlich konzentrieren sich die Beiträge des Bandes auf die frühchristlichen und frühbyzantinischen Jahrhun- derte und stellen für diese Zeitspanne den räumlichen Aspekt in den Vordergrund, wobei nicht von Forschungs- ansätzen wie sites of memory oder sacred spaces ausgegangen wird, sondern von einem unmittelbaren geographi- schen Bezug, d. h. die Beiträge tragen der Tatsache Rechnung, dass die byzantinischen Regionen sich in ihrer religiösen und kulturellen Geschichte in Antike und Spätantike, aber auch in der Entwicklung des christlichen Kultes und seines Umganges mit vorchristlichen Traditionen oft deutlich voneinander unterscheiden.

Kein Zweifel besteht aber auch an den Gemeinsamkeiten der Entwicklung im östlichen Christentum bei der bereitwilligen Akzeptanz der Vermittlerrolle der Jungfrau und Mutter zum göttlichen Sohn, die den gläubigen Menschen das Vorbringen ihrer Anliegen bei Gott zu erleichtern vermochte. Dadurch, dass die Rolle der Theotokos in den dogmatischen Festlegungen der ökumenischen Konzilen seit dem 5. Jahrhundert ihren Niederschlag fand, konnten sich in den Schriften der Kirchenväter und in der Glaubenspraxis gemeinsame Leitlinien herausbilden, in denen die regionalen dogmatischen und kultischen Entwicklungen ihre Grenzen und Orientierungsmöglichkeiten fanden.

Die Einführung von Leena Mari Peltomaa und Andreas Külzer bietet neben der allgemeinen Einstimmung in die Thematik auch eine wichtige Hilfe und Anleitung bei der Lektüre der einzelnen Beiträge, denn sie vermittelt die Gesamtsicht des Phänomens Presbeia Theotokou und erleichtert dadurch das Verständnis für die oft sehr spezialisierten nachfolgenden Texte. Allen Autoren ist dafür zu danken, dass sie – bei unterschiedlichen metho- dischen Zugängen – zu den einzelnen byzantinischen Kulturlandschaften durchwegs neue und oft überraschende Erkenntnisse veröffentlichen. Der letzte Beitrag verlässt den Rahmen der räumlichen Orientierung aller anderen Untersuchungen, da er thematisch passende byzantinische Bleisiegel behandelt. Indirekt verweist er auf weitere, über die (sinnvolle) Grenzziehung des vorliegenden Bandes hinausgehende, fruchtbare Forschungsansätze zum Thema – nur beispielhaft sei darauf hingewiesen, dass etwa die Untersuchung der byzantinischen Inschriften, ins- besondere der griechischen, lateinischen, syrischen und armenischen, wertvolle (und regionenspezifische) Erkennt- nisse liefern dürfte.

Das Leitmotiv des vorliegenden Bandes und die Inhalte vieler Beiträge sind im Umfeld der Fächer, die der Erforschung der Kultur des euromediterranen Raumes gewidmet sind, in vieler Hinsicht interdisziplinär. Dies lässt hoffen, dass die Ergebnisse über den Bereich der Byzanzforschung hinaus rezipiert werden und zu weiteren Unter- suchungen im Rahmen der Kulturwissenschaften anregen.

Johannes Koder

(11)
(12)

Le e n a Ma r i Pe L t o M a a

an d r e a s Kü L z e r

Presbeia Theotokou: An Introduction

The idea behind the collection of essays in this volume is to bring into focus one main aspect of the Marian cult – the invocations of Mary – across the Byzantine Empire, in the period we are used to calling Early Byzantine.

The collection will throw light on the regional and local traditions which unfolded within the developing cult in the Christian Ecumene, up to about the end of Iconoclasm (843). It is agreed that regional diversity was an inher- ent element of the cult of Mary; the cult neither developed nor was established at the same time and in the same manner throughout the empire, although doctrinal teaching on the Virgin and the Theotokos had the same biblical and conciliar basis.1 On these grounds, in this volume fourteen contributors, representing expertise in early Chris- tian, Late-Antique and Byzantine Studies, exemplify the role that Mary came to play in the religious life and culture of various regions, cities and towns: Palestine, Egypt, Constantinople, Syria, Antioch, Armenia, Durrës, Rome, Italy, and North Africa. The sources – objects, texts and documents – are examined from the vantage points of archaeology, art history, papyrology, sigillography, patristics, religious studies and theology.

The traces of Mary’s intercessory role in Byzantine history are copious and – as we know – do not disappear at the historical turning-point of 1453; Deesis / “Mary interceding together with John the Baptist” is still as recur- rent a motif in iconography as the invocation of the Mother of God is incessant in Byzantine / Orthodox liturgy.

It is not clear when the Virgin Theotokos occupied the position of the principal intercessor in the orthodox hierar- chy of sanctity.2 In any case, her divine motherhood justified belief in her intercessory capacity, exceeding the powers of the other saints (apostles, martyrs, virgins, etc.).3 In the controversy over the icons (715–787 and 813–843) Mary’s figure became omnipresent and at the end of Iconoclasm she appeared as the intercessor of the empire. By then the veneration of Mary had taken the shape of a highly sophisticated cult,4 recognizable as part of religious and political institutions, material culture and social practices. The formative process had lasted for centuries and to all appearances it is difficult to grasp the full extent of the phenomenon.

In her introduction to the recent volume, The Cult of the Mother of God in Byzantium, Averil Cameron speaks about “the sheer capaciousness of the theme of the Theotokos” that yields “the space for so many excellent new studies”.5 Seen from another angle, this capaciousness eventuates in a fragmentary picture of the development of the cult. Mary “can be, and has been, all things to everyone”, which is why it is “hard to arrive at convincing general theories”, as Cameron says.6 Nevertheless, by examining various trends – like the tendency towards ap-

1 Mary as the Virgin (παρθένος) is based on Septuaginta (Isa 7,14) and the Gospels (Mt 1,23 and Lk 1,27). The reading of Isa 7,14 by Christians caused a bitter controversy of long duration with Jews, with ongoing impact on their mutual distrust. Concerning its significance for “Mentalitätsgeschichte in Byzanz”, consult A. Külzer, Disputationes graecae contra Iudaeos. Untersuchungen zur byzantinischen antijüdischen Dialogliteratur und ihrem Judenbild. Byzantinisches Archiv 18. Stuttgart–Leipzig 1999, esp. 261–262. There is no specific dogma of the Theotokos. The Council of Ephesus (431), while interpreting the second letter of Cyril of Alexandria to Nestorius as or- thodox and conforming to the creed of Nicaea (325), agreed with Cyril’s arguments for giving Mary the title of Theotokos. Cf. L. M.

Peltomaa, The Image of the Virgin Mary in the Akathistos Hymn. The Medieval Mediterranean 35. Leiden–Boston–Cologne 2001, 57–58.

2 Leslie Brubaker and John Haldon seem to suggest that it did not happen before Iconoclasm. Cf. Idem, Byzantium in the Iconoclast Era, c. 680–850: A History. Cambridge u. a. 2011, 32.

3 E.g., Basil of Seleucia (d. after 458), Hom. 39, PG 85.448B: Εἴδετε πηλίκον δι᾿ αὐτῆς ἐπράχθη μυστήριον, πᾶσαν ὑπερβαῖνον καὶ γλῶτταν καὶ ἔννοιαν. Τίς οὖν οὺκ θαυμάσειε τὴν μεγάλην τῆς Θεοτόκου δύναμιν· καὶ ὅσον ὑπερανέχει τοὺς ὅσους τιμῶμεν ἁγίους; – Know what a great mystery has been worked through her, which surpasses every tongue and mind. Who then could not marvel at the great power of the Theotokos and how much she excels those we greatly honour as saints?

4 On the usage of the term ‘cult’, cf. A. Cameron, Introduction, in: M. Vassilaki (ed.), Images of the Mother of God. Perceptions of the Theotokos in Byzantium. Aldershot u. a. 2005, xxix.

5 L. Brubaker – M. B. Cunningham (eds.), The Cult of the Mother of God in Byzantium. Texts and Images. Birmingham Byzantine and Ottoman Studies 11. Aldershot u. a. 2011, 3.

6 Ibid.

(13)

pealing to Mary as intercessor – it is possible to create a more coherent picture of her cult. It has to be stressed, however, that our volume does not aim at synthesizing “the diverse materials into a coherent narrative”, which in any case would be also absolutely impossible.7 Hence, an interpretation of the tendency towards Mary’s interces- sory capacity that drove and contributed to the establishment of her Byzantine cult will remain a task for further studies. We are happy to be able to present multiple evidence of this important trend from the early Byzantine period.

It must be added that this trend is important not only for the study of Byzantines’ religious life. It is crucial also for the study of the early Byzantine society, whose striking feature – in comparison with the world we are living in – was a strict social order, based on law and status consciousness. Under such circumstances the signif- icance of intercession – the action of interceding or pleading on behalf of another or a party in trouble – is un- questionable as a means of settling for problems. Already long before CE, in Mesopotamia, the cradle of western civilization, the practice of interceding with kings and divinities was developed into sophisticated rituals.8 It seems evident that in the ancient world the quality that primarily was expected from intercessors was social appropriate- ness. This held for both religious and ethnic communities. Understandably, in order to have at least in theory any possibility of exerting influence, intercessors had to have access to the authority – a deity, ruler or judge. Thus, in view of a successful outcome of the intercessory act, status, social position and proximity to authority qualified certain members of society to be intercessors. Thus the notion of the proper social order must have been implicit in the practice of interceding. This pattern acquired a new feature as Christian “heroes of faith” – apostles, martyrs, ascetics, etc. – were accepted as intercessors without having been qualified by social status. Yet the hierarchical structure of the holy intercessors, who were commemorated in liturgy, betrays the fact that ranking was relevant.

Since the significance of social status was never ignored in the Christian Roman Empire, it can be assumed that an implicit preoccupation was always associated also with Mary’s place in this hierarchy – even in representations that do not explicitly ask her to intercede. The intercessory acts executed by means of prayer formulae need no interpretation but images are problematic if there are no traditions connecting the pictorial representations with intercessions. As for the extent of latent preoccupation in such representations, it is a figure whose approximation from case to case must be left for experts who are able to plumb their material by means of contextual analysis and comparison, as several papers of this collection show.

The Greek title of the volume, Presbeia Theotokou, suggests the doctrinal background that cannot be overlooked when discussing Mary’s role as intercessor. The word Theotokos, literally “the one who gives birth to God”, is charged with christology; it is associated with the Nestorian controversy, the Council of Ephesus of 431, the con- ciliation of the Cyrillian and the Antiochian parties by the Formula Unionis in 433, and the “victory of the The- otokos”.9 Ephesus seemingly represents a turning-point in the public and official veneration of Mary, the triumphal arch of the basilica Santa Maria Maggiore (by its modern name) in Rome being an illustrious piece of evidence for the atmosphere of the time.10 Much of the volume is devoted to the mariology of miaphysite traditions, although a comparison with the mariological material from Chalcedonian Palestine, Constantinople and Rome, may give the impression that Mary’s position as intercessor did not receive as much attention in anti-Chalcedonian church- es. Undoubtedly this is a question requiring proper theological consideration, for with regard to Mary’s interces- sory position no difference can be discerned between the christologies of the opposing parties. In any case, judg- ing from the rhetoric of contemporary homilies and hymnography,11 the epithet Theotokos called forth feelings of awe, demanding correct ekphrasis. We “hear” that from the sublime tune in which Byzantine preachers invoked the figure of Mary. Hence it may be concluded that this characteristically Byzantine tone resounded also in private prayers to Mary to intercede with God.

7 On the unavoidable methodological problematic concerning the study of the cult of Mary as well as the study of pilgrimage, see J. Elsner, Piety and Passion: Contest and Consensus in the Audiences for Early Christian Pilgrimage, in: J. Elsner – I. Rutherford (eds.), Pilgrimage in Graeco Roman & Early Christian Antiquity. Seeing the Gods. Oxford 2005, 411–434, loc.cit. 421.

8 Vide O. Michel – Th. Klauser, Gebet II (Fürbitte). Reallexikon für Antike und Christentum 9 (1976) 1–36, 3–5.

9 Peltomaa, The Image of the Virgin Mary 50–62, 85–101, 113–114.

10 G. A. Wellen, Theotokos. Eine ikonographische Abhandlung über das Gottesmutterbild in frühchristlicher Zeit. Utrecht–Antwerpen 1960, 93–131, esp. 97.

11 The Akathistos Hymn is practically the only preserved work of hymnography reflecting the christological issue of the period.

(14)

As for the word presbeia,12 the standard translation in Christian usage of this term is “intercession”, which is a special form of prayer. While one speaks in an ordinary petitionary prayer only on behalf of oneself, in an inter- cessory prayer the needs of others are brought before God. As in a homily of Chrysostom, the word is found in- numerable times in homilies and liturgical prayers: “ … we ourselves will also be able to enjoy more liberty of speech and be deemed worthy of God’s most abundant philanthropy, in this present life as well as on the future day of horror, through the prayers and intercessions (euchais and presbeiais) of those acceptable to God …”13 Here intercessors are called “those acceptable to God”. Perhaps Chrysostom had especially martyrs in mind, for in his time religious life was centred on martyrs.14 The impression that devotion to Mary was “overshadowed by the enthusiastic cult of the martyrs for the first three centuries at any rate”, seems to explain the practically non-exis- tent evidence of prayers addressed to Mary from that time.15 Yet, so far we know too little of the seminal phase of the cult of Mary – especially of its regional conditions and developments – to be able to say whether Mary’s in- tercessory role really was affected by the enthusiasm for martyrs.

Judging from its occurrences in all kinds of sources the word presbeia in Byzantine understanding was in the first place associated with embassies and advocacy. From ancient times onwards it is predominantly met with in texts referring to a body of ambassadors sent for negotiations.16 Accordingly, the Patristic Greek Lexicon informs us that in Christian contexts presbeia is used for the work of Christians as God’s or Christ’s ambassadors and for special commissions performed in the service of the Church. The request or entreaty presented by a presbeia was also called presbeia. The highly valued status that ancient cultures assigned to the elder or eldest male members of a clan, family and society is revealed by the words “rank” and “dignity”, which are rendered as the basic mean- ings for the patristic notion of presbeia.17 Altogether, it seems that we should be aware that, for Byzantines, the native Greek speakers, the formula “through/by means of the intercessory prayers of …” (presbeiais …) implied intercessors’ status and, hence, role in society.18 How these things stood in relation to the role of Mary as interces- sor is a question left to be answered by future studies of the cult of Mary.

Although the veneration of Mary within the Church was “universal”, her cult evolved in the conditions that a particular place or region offered. Peter Brown, speaking about the making of Christianity in the West, 350–550 AD, aptly says that, “Each Christian region had a landscape of its own”.19 Without doubt this holds also for the late-antique Eastern Roman Empire. Over the span of the five centuries with which this volume is concerned, the empire turned into a thoroughly Christian society and at the end of Iconoclasm the figure of Mary is found as the intercessor of the entire empire. Why and how this development took place is a question that challenges not only the study of the Byzantine cult of Mary but the study of Byzantine society in general. Our volume will be a con- tribution to the search for an explanation. The glimpses of different “landscapes” in Byzantine territory show first of all the cultural contexts where Mary’s intercessory role manifested itself. The selected regions cover a great part but not all of the territory that was under East Roman or Byzantine rule from the 4th to the 9th century. While places associated with Mary through the Gospels and legendary stories about her and her “relics” developed into Marian pilgrimage centres, vast areas show no particular traces of the cult of Mary,20 though it is clear that Mary as the mother of Jesus was known to all Christianity.

12 See H. G. Liddell – R. Scott, A Greek–English Lexicon, with a revised supplement. Oxford 91996, 1461f. s. v. πρεσβεία, ἡ. The basic meaning is age, seniority, the state or right of the elder.

13 Joannes Chrysostomus, Homilia IX in Genesin, PG 53, col. 81: (Οὕτω γὰρ καὶ ὁ μακάριος προφήτης Δαυΐδ διδάσκει λέγων· Ἔκκλινον ἀπὸ κακοῦ, καὶ ποίησον ἀγαθόν. Ἂν οὕτω τὰ καθ´ ἐαυτοὺς οἰκονομῶμεν, καὶ μετὰ τῆς ἀποχῆς τῶν βρωμάτων καὶ τὴν ἀποχὴν τῆς κακίας ἐπιδειξώμεθα,) δυνησόμεθα καὶ αὐτοὶ πλείονος ἀπολαῦσαι τῆς παῤῥησίας, καὶ δαψιλεστέρας ἀξιωθῆναι τῆς παρὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ φιλανθρωπίας, καὶ ἐν τῷ παρόντι βίῳ, καὶ ἐν τῇ μελλούσῃ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ τῇ φοβερᾷ, εὐχαῖς καὶ πρεσβείαις τῶν εὐαρεστησάντων αὐτῷ…

14 V. M. Limberis, Architects of Piety. The Cappadocian Fathers and the Cult of the Martyrs. Oxford 2011.

15 J. N. D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines. London 51989, 491.

16 TLG search on πρεσβεία. See also Liddell – Scott. Today the word appears around the world at the entrances of the Embassies of Greece:

ΠΡΕΣΒΕΙΑ ΤΗΣ ΕΛΛΑΔΟΣ.

17 Cf. G. W. H. Lampe, A Patristic Greek Lexicon. Oxford 91995, 1128 s. v.

18 Of course, not only the etymology of this Greek word, but the idea itself – that an influential party is sought for to intercede on behalf of someone in trouble – implies a social context, irrespective of the language used.

19 P. Brown, Through the Eye of a Needle. Wealth, the Fall of Rome, and the Making of Christianity in the West, 350–550 AD. Princeton, NJ–Oxford 2012, xxii.

20 It is quite possible that future studies and reinterpretations can change this view.

(15)

We will begin to consider the evidence of Mary’s intercessory role in Palestine where the historical Mary lived.

Then we turn to Egypt and from there we go to Constantinople. Syria, including Antioch, Armenia and Dyrrachi- um in Albania represent the East, while Rome, Italy and North Africa belong to the West. In addition, a paper on seals with non-regional approach is included in the collection.

The crucial problem that long afflicted research on the early cult of Mary can be attributed to the disparagement of ancient apocryphal sources by past generations of scholars.21 The situation changed with the recognition of the historical value of the textual material that had been useless for theological studies, oriented to the doctrinal teach- ing of the early church Fathers. In this respect the case of the ancient Dormition apocrypha, preserved in late-an- tique Palestine, from which Stephen Shoemaker draws his conclusions, is quite illuminating. There is no doubt that the Transitus Mariae literature reflects the earliest devotion to Mary and that the Dormition apocrypha, issu- ing from the oldest traditions, disclose the existence of marian intercession and even a marian cult in the region of Palestine well before the Council of Ephesus.

Shoemaker’s study of this extremely problematic material, which – alas! – is practically inaccessible to “those uninitiated”, has already resulted in new knowledge of the evolution of these narrative traditions.22 Now, as we are informed that “it was most likely belief in Mary’s intercession that first gave rise to the early Christian accounts of Mary’s miraculous departure from this world and her apocalyptic journey into the next”,23 – and not the other way round – of necessity the question of the historicity behind the traditions keeps cropping up. In this regard an observation by Shoemaker is particularly important: some of the very earliest evidence for marian devotion and intercession is found in early Christian communities in late-antique Palestine. It is of course not surprising that in Palestine there were Christian communities, but since the matter concerns the greatest issue of the research on Mary – why her cult ever emerged – the observation is significant. Regarding the “axiom” of the so-called goddess theory,24 we can take it for granted that – since Christianity grew out from Jewish religion – in Christian thought there was no category “goddess”. The absence of female deities or goddesses in Christian religion is often explained in research literature by the church Fathers’ patriarchal pattern of thought; although there is no doubt that it was fundamentally an implication of God’s command to Israel.25 Whether Christians in ancient Palestine knew god- desses and their cults is beside the point,26 because the followers of Jesus Christ were the only group of people who in general may have had any reason to be interested in the mother of their Master. Marian veneration simply could not start outside Christian circles. Clearly, finding in Palestine and Jerusalem a cradle of marian piety requires another explanation than the one offered by the goddess theory. There is still material from this region which has only begun to be explored. The Jerusalem Georgian Chantbook, “a tremendous resource”,27 which Shoemaker briefly presents in this chapter, promises to shed new light on the history of marian piety and thus also on Mary’s intercessory role in the late-antique Near East.

Rina Avner recalls the fact that Jewish religion and culture knew many intercessors. Her focus is laid on the Kathisma, where – according to the Protoevangelium of James – Mary rested on her way to Bethlehem. In that rural area along the road and near Bethlehem there was also situated the tomb of Rachel, whose veneration as a mother and a successful intercessor had been popular in that area. The author concludes that the cult of the The- otokos at the Kathisma emerged from local veneration of Rachel. In addition her persuasive argument urges a closer examination of the roles of the Old Testament intercessors to find out how much Mary’s intercessory role owes to Jewish culture.28

21 Cf. J. Baun, Tales from another Byzantium. Celestial Journey and Local Community in the Medieval Greek Apocrypha. Cambridge 2007, 3.

22 S. J. Shoemaker, Ancient Traditions of the Virgin Mary’s Dormition and Assumption. Oxford 2002.

23 Here Shoemaker relies on E. Norelli, Marie des apocryphes: enquête sur la mère de Jésus dans le christianisme antique. Christianismes antiques. Geneve 2009, 132–136.

24 According to this theory, human need for maternal protection was projected onto Mary as the ancient goddesses lost their position with Christianization. On the so-called goddess-theory, consult L. M. Peltomaa, Towards the Origins of the History of the Cult of Mary. Studia Patristica 40 (2006) 75–86, esp. 78–80.

25 Christianity cannot be disconnected from the history of Israel, for the salvation of which God uttered his commandments through Moses, cf. Ex 20,1–3; Dt 5,6–7.

26 Cf. F. A. Trombley, Hellenic Religion and Christianization c. 370–527, I–II. Leiden–New York–Cologne 1993–1994, esp. I 98ff.

27 A massive collection of liturgical hymns from the fifth to the seventh centuries.

28 Consult, e.g., M. Widmer, Moses, God, and the Dynamics of Intercessory Prayer. A Study of Exodus 32–34 and Numbers 13–14. For- schungen zum Alten Testament 2. Reihe 8. Tübingen 2004.

(16)

“Egypt”, as researchers engaged with the early cult of Mary very well know, divides scholarly views about the possible influence of the cult of Isis on that of Mary.29 In his exhaustive treatise Arne Effenberger discusses the complex problem of this influence. A relatively large part of the chapter is dedicated to the question of interpreting the iconographic type of Galaktotrophousa, whose model is found in the “Isis lactans”. As the Galaktotrophousa instances are examined in association with Christian places, e.g., in a monastery’s areas for prayer, several aspects can be singled out: eucharistic, eschatological, ecclesiological and soteriological, depending on the close context.

The study shows – though unintentionally – that it was not the ancient form/model, but the context that provides keys for understanding the appearances of the Galaktotrophousa in Christian environments. Art-historical evidence of Mary’s intercessory role before the Council of Ephesus is not found in Egypt. The material, however, indicates that well before Ephesus marian piety outside the church was firmly anchored in the private sphere of the people, i.e., to the social milieu of the middle-class town/city-dwellers.

At the same time as religious art in Egypt leaves us exposed to interpretations, in the field of theology the unambiguous position of Cyril of Alexandria conversely enables us to pinpoint the origins of the idea of Mary’s intercessory powers. Fathoming Cyril of Alexandria’s incarnational theology, Antonia Atanassova evinces Cyril’s substantial contribution to the teaching on Mary’s motherhood with the focus on her womb. According to Atanass- ova, Cyril’s explicit emphasis on Mary’s mediatory role between God and creation was “a definitive theological novelty”. By elucidating the thought in Cyril’s voluminous writings, in which he defended the title Theotokos against Nestorius’ christological reasoning in the controversy leading to Ephesus, Atanassova presents the unique Christian roots of the recognition of Mary’s role. In this respect the notion entertained by some scholars that ear- ly mariology is “a natural outgrowth of the goddess-cults”, does not hold true.30

However, the theological aspect of Mary’s role is only one side of the coin: the devotional use of the epithet Theotokos is the reverse. Theodore de Bruyn reviews the history of this word to illustrate the problematic of ex- amining the cult of Mary in Egyptian Christianity, apparent from the evidence presented here. This chapter on appeals to the intercessions of Mary in Greek liturgical and paraliturgical texts from Egypt focuses on a very specific question: in what form and at what time did appeals to the intercession of Mary in Egypt appear in eu- charistic liturgies and individual prayers for healing and protection? A thoroughgoing answer is given, based both on a careful analysis of the Egyptian eucharistic anaphoras, representing recent scholarship, and on the author’s own research into Greek amulets. The answer – brilliantly balanced considerations of the lacunose evidence – renders however only a provisional hypothesis, “with several caveats”, as the author states.

The most plausible supposition, namely that the developed formulae found in fifth-century amulets reflect a practice that was already achieving liturgical expression in the fourth century, leads to silence. De Bruyn’s remark in the beginning of the chapter concerning several elements which become “less certain when they are examined more closely” proves to be true in the end. The famous papyrus P.Ryl. III 470, with the prayer for protection ad- dressed directly to the Theotokos (Sub tuum praesidium), is only one example of the typical difficulties involved in the sort of textual and material evidence de Bruyn has been investigating. The possibility exists all the time that previous conceptions of the context are not correct. His conclusion, “recourse to theory is inevitable”, needs no further reasoning – the fact is evident from this study. The question about theory poses, however, a difficult prob- lem.Cyril Mango’s assessment that Constantinople became ”a terrestrial fief” of the Theotokos during the reign of Justinian (527–565) 31 has incited Leena Mari Peltomaa to pursue the question why it was Mary’s patronage that was sought in particular. The attention that Mary received at that time in theology and imperial matters is import- ant in terms of our topic, the intercessory role of Mary, for in the general consciousness it was the most famous instance of miracles assigned to the Virgin in Byzantine history that catapulted Mary into the position of the pro- tectress of the imperial city – the deliverance of Constantinople from the siege of Constantinople by the Avars and

29 Cf. Peltomaa, Towards the Origins 86.

30 Cf. Atanassova’s paper, ref. to St. Benko, The Virgin Goddess. Studies in the Pagan and Christian Roots of Mariology. Studies in the History of Religion 59. Leiden–New York–Cologne 1993.

31 C. Mango, Constantinople as Theotokoupolis, in: M. Vassilaki (ed.), Mother of God. Representations of the Virgin in Byzantine Art.

Milan 2000, 17–25.

(17)

Persians in 62632 in the reign of Heraclius (610–641).33 Three contemporary eyewitness documents, arising from different literary genres,34 emphasize that God saved the city from barbarian terror by the intercession of the The- otokos, whereby they bear evidence that Constantinopolitans’ belief in Mary’s intercessory capacity was firmly established in orthodoxy.35

However, it appears that to a certain degree current research adheres to the thought that marian piety in Con- stantinople was not based on the same foundations as those on which these rhetorically skilled churchmen of the highest rank put their emphasis.36 Of course, the question is not about theological finesses, though it is relevant to notice that doctrinally the records of the siege do not digress from earlier evidence from Constantinople, viz. the Akathistos hymn from the fifth and the hymnography of Romanos from the sixth century. Fundamentally, the question involves the intellectual basis of human existence: why we are here, from where we are coming and where we are going. The majority of Constantinopolitans of the Justinianic period, we may assume, received Christian answers to these questions along with their mothers’ milk.37 Thus they learned that the framework to which mean- ing of life was related was the message of redemption of the world through Christ – or rather, to put it in the way Byzantines themselves preferred – that meaning of life was related to oikonomia, the plan of God. The analysis, which Peltomaa makes on the basis of Romanos’ hymnography, indicates that the prerequisite for the idea of Mary’s intercessory role was the Byzantine conception of oikonomia, in which Mary was given the role of Eve’s advocate.

The significance of this – thoroughly Christian – idea had fully unfolded in the eschatological atmosphere of the Justinianic period, i.e., long before the siege of 626.

Thus Mary’s dominant role as protectress of the imperial city, manifest in the siege sources, was an aspect of her intercessory role which apparently had developed from different vantage points. (This is merely an inference.

The topic has not been discussed in research literature.) The richness of ideas connected with Mary’s intercessions in the marian corpus from the iconoclast period, which Mary Cunningham presents in this volume, serves as the best evidence that this is the continuous elaboration of an old theme. A certain tendency appears, however, in the eighth–ninth-century marian literature (homiletic, hymnographic, hagiographic), which evokes Cunningham’s speculation: “Do we then have two different Virgins, one of whom is important above all for her role in the incar- nation of Christ while the other begins to exercise a surprising degree of autonomy and power?”

This is really an important question. E.g., from “autonomy and power” it is often gathered that it is a feature owing more to the ancient goddess tradition in Constantinople than to ingenuous Christian piety and veneration of Mary.38 What interests Cunningham, instead, is finding out whether Mary’s images were “successfully incorporat- ed into a composite whole” – an idea which obviously proposes that Byzantine Christians, in their prayers, ad- dressed to Mary as a “whole” human being with different characteristics. If the distinction we are accustomed to

32 J. D. Howard-Johnston, The Siege of Constantinople in 626, in: C. Mango – G. Dagron (eds.), Constantinople and its Hinterland. Alder- shot 1995, 131–142.

33 W. E. Kaegi, Heraclius, Emperor of Byzantium. Cambridge 2003, 122–141.

34 A chronicle: L. Dindorfius, Chronicon Paschale, Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae. Bonnae 1832, 716–726; trans. in: Michael Whitby – Mary Whitby (eds.), Chronicon Paschale 284–628 AD. Translated Texts for Historians. Liverpool 1989; a homily attributed to Theodore Syncellus: L. Sternbach, Analecta Avarica. Cracoviae 1900, 298–320; a rhetorical poem of George of Pisidia, in: A. Pertusi, Bellum Avaricum di Giorgio di Pisidia. Poemi, vol. 1. Panegirici Epici. Studia Patristica et Byzantina 7. Ettal 1959, 176–224. – Brilliant analyses of these sources are to be found in J. Howard-Johnston, Witnesses to a World Crisis. Historians and Histories of the Middle East in the Seventh Century. Oxford 2010, 16ff (George of Pisidia), 45–48 (Chronicon Paschale; Howard-Johnston convincingly attributes it to Patriarch Sergius), 146–147 (Theodore Syncellus).

35 “Le document le plus complet” (F. Barišić, Le siège de Constantinople par les Avares et les Slaves en 626. Byzantion 24 [1954] 371–395, loc. cit. 375) is the long homily of Syncellus, supplying us with a day-by-day account of the siege. Simultaneously it offers a highly sophisticated explanation of the event in the light of Holy Scripture, revealing a divine “logic” behind the human misfortune. Unfortu- nately, no detailed scholarly analysis of this document is available. In any case, in this text the victorious role of the Virgin is founded on Christian understanding of the incarnation, i.e., divine economy, and the christological dogma of the Theotokos (see L. M. Peltomaa, The Role of the Virgin Mary at the Siege of Constantinople in 626. Scrinium 5 [2009] 284–299, esp. 287–290, 294–295).

36 For example, Bissera Pentcheva, taking at face value the rhetorical models of ancient goddesses for Mary in the battle, appearing in Syncellus and George of Pisidia, but disregarding the explicit Christian contextualization of the siege by the three eyewitnesses, concludes that contemporary perceptions of Mary’s role in battle reflect belief in powers which previously were associated with the pagan mother goddesses. See B. V. Pentcheva, Icons and Power. The Mother of God in Byzantium. University Park, PA 2006, 64–66.

37 Infant baptism is a disputed theme of which Wikipedia provides a good overview, see “Baptism”. Cf. G. W. H. Lampe, A Patristic Greek Lexicon. Oxford 91995, 284–288 s. v βάπτισμα. However, there can be no doubt that by the reign of Justinian children in Christian families had been raised as Christians for many generations, even since Constantine’s conversion.

38 Recently Pentcheva, Icons and Power.

(18)

make between “popular” texts and those “qualified” for the use in church proves to be false, as Cunningham suggests, the literary figure of Mary may appear more coherent. It is worth noting that Mary in her role of the intercessor who has parrhesia with Christ in heaven is strikingly evident in the eighth- and ninth-century literary marian corpus of Constantinopolitan provenance.

The chapter, “Ancient Syriac Sources on Mary’s Role as Intercessor”, is a broad treatment of a topic that has never before been highlighted in studies on early Christian texts in Syriac. The bulk of the material Cornelia Horn has chosen for investigation is to a great extent problematic with regard to authenticity and dating. This concerns especially the important Syriac text of the Transitus Mariae (the Six Books of the Transitus Mariae) and liturgical hymnography (the Syriac Theotokia and the supplications ascribed to Rabbula of Edessa). Nevertheless, Horn presents in detail the literary and liturgical contexts in which ancient Christians’ belief in Mary’s intercessory capacity appeared in the Syriac domain.

Broadly speaking, in the Syriac Christian culture of the ancient Near East the Transitus Mariae literature proves to be the most important witness to the early role of Mary as intercessor. Therefore the conspicuous absence of references to Mary’s intercessory role both in the marian poetry of Ephraem the Syrian (d. 373) and in the inau- thentic hymns – conflated versions of the originals up to the sixth century – seems difficult to explain. Even so, perhaps we should notice that the ideological framework with which Mary’s intercessory function comes into sight in the Six Books of the Transitus Mariae implies an eschatological perspective, which is found, e.g., in Ephraem’s Hymns on Paradise.39

Thanks to Horn’s careful descriptions of the contents of the chosen texts we are able to see a clear difference between Mary’s image as intercessor in the Transitus Mariae narratives and in the liturgical texts, where Mary is frequently pictured as intercessor and supplicant. The Dormition tradition renders an image of the real woman Mary, who is there a personality. The liturgical hymnography again, emphasizing her properties, based on well- known biblical and/or doctrinal references used in christological discourse, offers an idealized, to a certain degree incoherent and therefore abstract image of the Virgin. Its “prototype” emerged during the Theotokos controversy and it is the same exalted figure that all christological homilies from the Ephesian period praise. Horn notes: “The

‘Greek tsunami’ of christological controversy that arrived on Syriac Christian shores in the fifth century played an important role in raising the profile of Mary as intercessor.”

Pauline Allen’s study, based on the set of 125 homilies of Severus, the patriarch of Antioch (512–518), requires us to correct our notion of Antioch as a mariological “terra dura”. Her argument rests on the contextualization of these homilies by reference to the author’s hymns, where Mary appears explicitly as the “vehicle of intercession”.

It is remarkable that Allen questions a whole tradition of patristic scholarship with its emphasis on the “negative”

influence of John Chrysostom on Antiochian mariology. The introduction of the great mariological feasts, the Annunciation and Dormition, and the large-scale building programmes in honour of the Theotokos, which took place in the region of Antioch later in the sixth century, are already seen as “prefigured” in Severus’ composite picture of the Theotokos. With regard to research on the cult of Mary, a revaluation of all kinds of evidence for the veneration of Mary within Antiochian territory up to this period appears as a desideratum.

The reason by which Allen explains Mary’s appearance as the “vehicle of intercession” in Severus’ hymns is as follows: “The genre of hymnography lent itself more than the homily to an affective and more immediate ap- proach to the Theotokos”. Although the observation may refer to Severus alone, it is important in general, because it suggests emotionality, which was the instrument of promoting cult. Here we have to state that emotions is a theme whose investigation in Byzantine studies remains “underdeveloped” – in favour of belief in “facts”.40 How- ever, it is clear that the cult of Mary did not develop in an unemotional soil. We could say that preachers like Severus cultivated that soil but that it was not their creation.41 As a matter of fact, the veneration of Mary – the prerequisite of a cult – is manifest already in the New Testament.42 So far we have no methodological tools for

39 Cf. S. J. Shoemaker, Ancient Traditions of the Virgin Mary’s Dormition and Assumption. Oxford 2002, 179–204, esp. 189–191.

40 See M. Hinterberger, Emotions in Byzantium in: L. James (ed.), A Companion to Byzantium. Chichester 2010, 123–134, esp. 124. Hin- terberger provides an illuminating historical perspective to the question of Byzantine emotionality. An insightful reading of texts that evoke emotions, see N. Tsironis, Emotion and the Senses in Marian Homilies of the Middle-Byzantine Period in: L. Brubaker – M. B.

Cunningham (eds.), The Cult of the Mother of God in Byzantium. Texts and Images. Aldershot 2011, 179–196.

41 M. B. Cunningham – P. Allen (eds.), Preacher and Audience. Studies in Early Christian and Byzantine Homiletics. A New History of the Sermon 1. Leiden–Boston–Cologne 1998.

42 Esp. Lk 1,42–45.

Referenzen

ÄHNLICHE DOKUMENTE

Martin, Studies in the Life and Ministry of the Early Paul and Related Issues, Lewiston/Queenston/Lampeter: Mellen Biblical Press 1993, who claims that it was only after

We shall not only argue that both Exodus 32-34 and Numbers 13-14 stand in canonical relationship to texts which ascribe unique prophetic qualities to Moses (e.g. 12), but also

This research utilizes an intuitive approach that allows to address all these three questions for a sample of 25 countries over the period 1935-2000. Exploiting variations in

The Money of the Mind and the God of Commodities – The real abstraction. according

In certain circles, Ptolemy I had already been worshipped as saviour, indeed even as a deity.59 Ptolemy II then had his deceased parents officially deified as gods of the

Hilary Robinson School of Art and Design University of Ulster at Belfast York Street. Belfast BT15 1ED Northern

(1) Virgin Orant, cappella dei Mascoli (exterior); (2) Virgin Orant, West façade; (3) 'Madonna della Grazia' (tribuna di San Pietro); (4) Virgin Orant next to the 'Madonna

The sculpture and the inscriptions on the tomb build a case for Maria's salvation which can be summarized as follows: Maria of Hungary was descended from royal ancestry and